Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Gender studies: Difference between revisions
AnnaAniston (talk | contribs) →Organising the front page: created {{Template:WikiProject Gender Studies Tasks}} |
|||
Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
* used a "reserved" (i.e. commented out) list to hold any overflow, so that the lists don't look cluttered. When updating, move items from the reserved list into the main list. |
* used a "reserved" (i.e. commented out) list to hold any overflow, so that the lists don't look cluttered. When updating, move items from the reserved list into the main list. |
||
I've been really tempted to split the expands into "people" and "topics", but I'm not sure that would work out in the long run. I hope that what I've done is OK with everyone. Cheers, [[User:AnnaAniston|<b><font color="red">An</font><font color="black">An</font></b>]] 01:03, 20 January 2006 (UTC) |
I've been really tempted to split the expands into "people" and "topics", but I'm not sure that would work out in the long run. I hope that what I've done is OK with everyone. Cheers, [[User:AnnaAniston|<b><font color="red">An</font><font color="black">An</font></b>]] 01:03, 20 January 2006 (UTC) |
||
:I do like how the box came out! I don't know about "update" either, since even if we do need to use it, it might leave things unclear just what needs to updated. I like the idea of a person/topic split as well, although on the other hand I'm not sure how we'd justify it. But it does all look nice, and it makes the project page look less hefty. [[User:Sarge Baldy|Sarge Baldy]] 02:43, 20 January 2006 (UTC) |
Revision as of 02:43, 20 January 2006
Please remember to sign your name with ~~~~ (IP users can do this too). Please also append new material to the bottom of the page or relevant section. Thanks!
Archive: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Gender Studies/archive1
And done. Please all, let us stick to discussing how we can best go about engaging in writing and improving articles, and take the philosophical arguments somewhere else. Ambi 23:42, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Why was the discussion I started on the silliness of changing "Miss" and "Mrs." to "Ms." archived? This whole project is motivated by a philosophical argument, and to the extent that the philosophical arguments motivate your proposed article "improvements" and "writing," I think they merit discussion.
The archiving of this discussion is deceptive. You are launching an ideologically-influenced campaign under the guise of good wikipedia housekeeping. Nathaniel
- Well I think thats a bit of a stretch. There definitely is a pro-feminist bias in this project, but I think you're exaggerating it.--Urthogie 08:20, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
Organising the front page
Hi all, I've been thinking that we could clean up the front page a bit more so that its more obvious what needs to be done. Wikipedia:WikiProject_Law (which I also participate in sometimes) has some sub-pages to classify work to be done - this might be a useful idea here to minimise the clutter. Also we should consider whether establishing templates could be a useful device for us to bring some articles under a subject umbrella? AnAn 11:09, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
- Sounds good to me - I think that would make this a lot easier to work on. I'm one of those who could probably contribute quite a bit here (seeing as it is my major, after all), but I'm probably too early in my degree to really know where to start on my own. Ambi 11:14, 17 January 2006 (UTC)
- I've created a /to do pagefor us. But that only moves the clutter from the front page to the to do page. To do has the advantage that you can use it to populate a pretty yellow {{todo}} box on the front page, but that's no use if the info itself is very messy. So, we can go about categorising the info on the to do page, or make an 'open tasks' template of the kind found here. The drawback with the template is that it looks difficult to maintain. What do people think? AnAn 02:59, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
- I think a template might be a good idea. Keeping a box isn't so difficult, just so long as you make sure there's an "edit" button handy to edit it at our whim. Sarge Baldy 03:03, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
- I've created a /to do pagefor us. But that only moves the clutter from the front page to the to do page. To do has the advantage that you can use it to populate a pretty yellow {{todo}} box on the front page, but that's no use if the info itself is very messy. So, we can go about categorising the info on the to do page, or make an 'open tasks' template of the kind found here. The drawback with the template is that it looks difficult to maintain. What do people think? AnAn 02:59, 19 January 2006 (UTC)
New tasks box
I've created {{Template:WikiProject Gender Studies Tasks}} which inserts a lovely tasks box into the page. I largely copied it from WP:CSB, but changed the colour from grey to the WP:GS lilac. I've made it so there's a link to /to do, and also an edit this list. I reckon we can continue dicussion and comments about the tasks on /to do, at least for now. In populating the tasks box with articles from /to do, I did the following:
- refered to List of feminists and List of women poets, but didn't extract any of the individual articles. I think these lists will need ongoing attention, and they're also open at WP:CSB.
- tried to include as many non-anglo, non-US, non-leaderly people in the main lists as possible, while making it balanced and interesting.
- couldn't really see any articles should be classified under "update". Maybe that could be deleted from the list?
- used a "reserved" (i.e. commented out) list to hold any overflow, so that the lists don't look cluttered. When updating, move items from the reserved list into the main list.
I've been really tempted to split the expands into "people" and "topics", but I'm not sure that would work out in the long run. I hope that what I've done is OK with everyone. Cheers, AnAn 01:03, 20 January 2006 (UTC)
- I do like how the box came out! I don't know about "update" either, since even if we do need to use it, it might leave things unclear just what needs to updated. I like the idea of a person/topic split as well, although on the other hand I'm not sure how we'd justify it. But it does all look nice, and it makes the project page look less hefty. Sarge Baldy 02:43, 20 January 2006 (UTC)